James B. Thornberry appeals the district court’s orders compelling him to comply with an Internal Revenue Service summons and finding him in contempt for not complying with that order. He makes a variety of contentions, all of which are meritless. The district court’s order compelling Thornberry to comply with the summons adopted the magistrate judge’s well-reasoned report and recommendation, and we affirm that order for the reasons stated in the report and recommendation. 1

We add the two points. First, Thornberry’s challenge to the district court’s contempt order is moot because Thornberry purged himself of the contempt by complying with the district court’s underlying order. See In re Grand Jury Subpoena Duces Tecum, 91-02922, 955 F.2d 670, 672 (11th Cir. 1992). Second, to the extent that Thornberry makes additional arguments on appeal, we need not address them because he did not raise them before the district court. See, e.g., Tech. Coating Applicators, Inc. v. United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co., 157 F.3d 843, 846 (11th Cir. 1998) (declining to consider an argument on appeal because the district court did not have an opportunity to address it).

AFFIRMED.